Here's our chance: Ask Discourse Why Jeff Broke Bad
-
"This meeting has been closed as primarily opinion-based and not constructive".
The good ideas thread is
-
How the /. "Ask [person] a question thing" works:
#I ALREADY PROVIDED THIS ANSWER WHY ARE YOU GIVING THE SAME ANSWER AGIAN IF YOU AREN'T READING THE WHOLE THREAD BEFORE REPLYING UR STOP DOING THAT READ MY ANSWER!!!!!!!
A good explanation of how it works:
I JUST GAVE ALICE A LINK TO MY ANSWER YOU SHOULD KNOW I WOULD HAVE LINKED BACK TO MY ANSWER AND WAITED FOR ME TO REPLY STOP !!!!!!!!!
-
I assumed it was because their content went to shit, which is why I no longer visit /.
For better content and a sane UI (original Slashdot that's been refactored and actively supported), there's SoylentNews.org
-
You silly Fucker, you can find better content than /. on a bubble gum wrapper.
A bubble gum wrapper that has been burned to ashes.
And thrown into the face of Ben Croshaw.
And then eaten by a Kodiak bear.
And shat out onto the grave of Claude Shannon.
That's how low the signal/noise ratio is there.
Though it's still better than WTDWTF.
-
That's how low the signal/noise ratio is there.
SIGNAL BOOST!!!!
I WILL UNFOLLOW EVERYONE WHO DOESNT REBLOG THIS!
-
-
I'm trying to make 'Fucker' a nickname for posters on WTDWTF, similar to 'slashdotter', '/b/tard', or 'goon'. I doubt it will catch on, but I'm having fun trying.
-
Try this instead:
WTFer
-
Try this instead:
WTFer
Jeez, here I am doing something stupid and you have to go and get all reasonable on me...
-
I doubt it will catch on, but I'm having fun trying.
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/ForcedMeme is forced.
-
-
Reproducing results isn't a part of peer review?
Bear in mind that depending on the area, those results might have taken years to accumulate, on expensive and one-of-a-kind equipment. Or they might be the result of a large clinical trial of thousands of people. You can't expect a few anonymous people who work in sort of the same general area to (a) be able to or (b) be willing to try to reproduce them, especially when they have their own research that they are supposed to be doing.As @boomzilla and @locallunatic mentioned, a reviewer can look at the analysis, but generally they're not going to try to reproduce the actual results.
If someone publishes his source code and it's not too hard to build, they try to reproduce the results.
Yes, it's probably a bit easier in CS. But the original quote was about biology, where compiling from source takes quite a bit longer :)
-
Has anything been posted yet?
-
Has anything been posted yet?
It was only posted 8 days ago. That's about half the time it takes for relevant news to make it to their front page.
Give them a chance.
-
Give them a chance.
To be a tad more sirius, http://interviews.slashdot.org/
##Alan Donovan and Brian Kernighan
Asked: 2015.10.28
Answered: 2015.11.183 weeks.
##John McAfee (presidential bid)
Asked: 2015.09.16
Answered: 2015.10.194½ weeks
##RMS
Asked:2015.07.29
Answered: 2015.09.106 weeks
##Keith Henson
Asked: 2015.08.17
Answered: 2015.08.269 days
-
Ah, sorry I didn't know what the turn around was.
-
@loopback0 said:
Maybe but this type of question also makes us look like some needy ex-girlfriend/boyfriend.
Why oh why won't return my calls, after all the pizzas I've had delivered to him?!?
-
@loopback0 said:
Maybe but this type of question also makes us look like some needy ex-girlfriend/boyfriend.
Why oh why won't return my calls, after all the pizzas I've had delivered to him?!?
Maybe if you paid for them, instead of expecting him to pay the delivery driver...
-
@Lorne_Kates said:
@powerlord said:
I assumed it was because their content went to shit, which is why I no longer visit /.
For better content and a sane UI (original Slashdot that's been refactored and actively supported),
Go over to Google's Wayback Machine and check out Slashdot from 10 years ago. Other than some extra shit along the left and right sides of the page, i don't see any significant difference between the UI then and now.
-
They tried to change the /. UI recently. It caused a huge ruckus, and about 50% of the readership threatened to quit the site, so they put it back...
-
They tried to change the /. UI recently. It caused a huge ruckus, and about 50% of the readership threatened to quit the site, so they put it back...
Other than that, I vaguely remember at least 2 or 3 "site redesigns" over the last 10+ years. And yet it pretty much still looks the same.
-
Other than that, I vaguely remember at least 2 or 3 "site redesigns" over the last 10+ years. And yet it pretty much still looks the same.
Basically they're worse than us when it comes to trying to move to something new: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-switch/wp/2014/02/07/slashdot-creator-on-redesign-backlash-every-slashdot-change-met-with-objections/
Rob "CmdrTaco" Malda, the creator of Slashdot who left the site in 2011, wasn't surprised by the outrage. "Pretty much every Slashdot change, big or small, as been met with some level of community objection," he said in an e-mail. "When I originally added (totally optional!) user accounts in 1998, the community freaked out that I was asking them to even consider logging in!"
-
They tried to change the /. UI recently. It caused a huge ruckus, and about 50% of the readership threatened to quit the site, so they put it back...
Heh, those crazy people, preferring broken antiquated software from early 2000s to the new and shiny discussion platforms...
-
Keep in mind that SlashDot's idea of "UI change" was to introduce a bunch of JavaScript driven things that made you click 500 times to read things that you used to be able to read in a single click.
And by 500 times, I mean once per comment you want to read as opposed to once per comment section.
-
The thing that's pissing me off with the site at the moment is the mobile version...
Egregious (and a tad contrived for the screenshot) example...
So don't fucking show them at all like the desktop site...
-
I also prefer not to see much of Slashdot, if it can be avoided.
-
That's why most of my consumption of it is restricted to my RSS reader where I can click the button marked
boring, saw that 2 weeks ago
after looking at the headlines.
-
That's why most of my consumption of it is restricted to my RSS reader where I can click the button marked boring, saw that 2 weeks ago after looking at the headlines.
And you can click the same button two weeks after that when they post the dupe.
-
@Lorne_Kates said:
And you can click the same button two weeks after that when they post the dupe.
Two weeks?
That's actually an improvement over the 4 days it used to be.
-
Reproducing results isn't a part of peer review?
It's not part of pre-publication peer review, which checks more whether what you're doing is relevant to the conference or journal (), whether your actual writing is bad, whether your conclusion follows from your results, whether the experiment you say you did might let you get those results at all. That sort of thing. It's not exactly rocket science writing a good paper (unless you're in that field), but it's quite a lot of work to do: it's all about showing what you've done, why you've done it, and what some of the implications of that are.
And at least with conference papers, you've usually only got a massively insufficient amount of space to do it in.
Reproduction of the results is something else. That's often sufficiently challenging and outright time-consuming that it's dropped on a convenient grad student as something for them to learn from. It's not even especially possible at all in some areas (some experimental processes destroy what they're analysing, or might involve equipment that costs millions of bucks). Subtle problems at that stage tend to result in either retractions or follow-up papers, the latter especially if the reasons for the problems are themselves scientifically interesting.
The analyses that follow downstream from the primary results are supposed to be much more reproducible, and will be checked by the review process. At least in the good journals. Publishing in the shit ones is a complete waste of time (except for people stuck in systems which only measure a count of the number of publications) and money.
I'm reliably told (but haven't yet personally verified in my own publications, for unimportant reasons) that being able to exactly document what was done and how it was analysed greatly eases the process of getting a paper into print in some fields. The core of what I'm working on at the moment is systems to do exactly that, getting such ways of working into how a lab actually does their day-to-day business.
-
-
So, nothing difficult asked, then. Big surprise.
-
-
[quote=atwood]
Discourse, on the other hand, is explicitly a system of discussion and opinion. There is no right and wrong.
[/quote]
[quote=atwood]
We have a few tricks up our sleeve at Discourse. We try to teach communities not just how the software works, but how human beings should work, with stuff like our Universal Rules of Civilized Discourse which is prominently featured in every install of Discourse and of course Creative Commons licensed.
[/quote]LOL.
-
That's very funny and all, but it's a bit micropenised neckbeardist. Which basically puts you against all of /.
-
We try to teach communities not just how the software works, but how human beings should work
Well, they did get that bit right.
Time for you to migrate off Discourse
-
[quote=dickwood]
The only downside of the .NET environment is, honestly, the SQL Server licensing costs which can be quite extreme at scale.[/quote]
Yeah, because .NET supports one and only one database.The main weakness of .NET is that it's not great for open source projects
Why?
Discourse is a system of empathy.
Yeah, because not only IS it shit, it FEELS like shit as well.
We have a few tricks up our sleeve at Discourse
No shit, Sherlock.
-
Yeah, because .NET supports one and only one database.
To be fair, the question was about running a Microsoft stack, not just .Net.
-
Good find. There, I posted:
-
Ooooh, missed that particular logic puzzle.
-
[quote=Atwood]
I can also testify that Ruby .. is, uh ... not ... absurdly fast.
[/quote]He's learning?
-
Reminds me of: http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=8RU7ExRtSxQ
-
Also....
Relevance of old answers
by ScottinghamAs SO ages, some of the offered solutions are no longer valid. Are there currently plans to automate some way of validating old answers automatically? This problem seems to be a larger problem with forums in general. Do you have any musings regarding aging forums?
Atwood: Anyone, even anonymous users, can suggest an edit to any question or answer on any Stack Exchange site. It is like Wikipedia in that regard. Once two other users with sufficient reputation approve the edit it goes through. Alternately, if you earn enough reputation, you can make direct edits yourself.
If you see information that's out of date, edit it to make it more up to date! Be the change you want to see, and all that.
https://what.thedailywtf.com/t/sigh-why-do-i-even-try-a-novlet-on-stackoverflow/51280
You can edit outdated or incorrect answers! "Be the change you want to see, and all that." Yeah, no, that doesn't work.
-
@Lorne_Kates said:
@PJH said:
That's why most of my consumption of it is restricted to my RSS reader where I can click the button marked boring, saw that 2 weeks ago after looking at the headlines.
And you can click the same button two
hours after that when they post the dupe.weeks
Slashdotified that for you